In re J.J. CA5
J.J. and his siblings were removed from their mother’s care. When later notified of the proceedings, alleged father Cole M. (appellant) said he did not want to have anything to do with the case. J.J. and his siblings were eventually returned to mother’s care.
Shortly thereafter, the children were again removed from the mother, and a subsequent dependency petition was filed with respect to J.J. and his siblings. This time, the Department did not notify appellant of several hearings, including the dispositional hearing. All parties concede this was error. Later, the Department did notify appellant of the section 366.26 hearing. Upon receipt of the notice of the proceedings on the subsequent dependency petition, appellant hired an attorney and sought DNA testing. When DNA testing revealed appellant is J.J.’s father, appellant sought services, visitation and custody.
Comments on In re J.J. CA5